First of all, these were immigration appeal files. Mr. Bourbonnais was a board member on the Immigration Appeal Division, so these were not refugee claims that he was sitting on.
There were just under approximately 900 files that Mr. Bourbonnais sat on at the board. The review was undertaken to see whether or not, on the record—and by the way, IAD hearings are in public and the files are accessible to the public—the evidence that was presented would reasonably support a decision that was made.
You must also understand that with immigration appeals, a likely outcome of a positive for an immigration appeal in some cases could be a stay of a removal order if those cases were removal order appeals. A stay is reviewed in three or five years, depending on the order made at the end of that appeal. Some of these files would have had a further review of a stay if it was a removal order appeal; therefore, other members might have taken on the case, and minister's counsel would have also participated. So other events would have taken place after that initial decision on that type of a case.
The other kinds of cases are sponsorship appeals, and those are situations in which it could be that a Canadian sponsor has sponsored a family member from overseas. In that situation, again the files would have been looked at to see if the evidence on the record would have properly supported that decision.